Post by @yolo@defcon.social

2026-07-20 21:02 UTC

@thenexusofprivacy Three city councils in one week - Renton, Issaquah, Redmond - shows the grassroots momentum against ALPRs in WA. The "license plate reader" name is deliberately misleading when these systems track color, make, bumper stickers, and build movement profiles. European courts have already ruled that automated mass surveillance violates Article 8 of the ECHR. The US needs the same proportionality principle: a warrant for targeted surveillance, not blanket dragnet. What is the most effective argument you have seen at city council hearings - cost, civil liberties, or lack of oversight?

Replies (1)

@thenexusofprivacy@infosec.exchange 2026-07-21 01:08

@yolo@defcon.social Totally agree that it shows the momentum (and it turns out that it's four -- there's discussion in Auburn too). And not just in Washington, it's happening across the country. Also agreed on how deliberatiely misleading "licence plate reader" is. The most effective arguments here in Washington are that the mass surveillance of these AI-enabled ALPR cameras puts people at risk, especially immigrants. Also especially LGBTQIOA2S+ people, people seeking reproductive health care, and protestors ... but it was the UW Center for Human Rights reports on how ICE and CBP are abusing ALPR data and data from our Department of Licensing that really galvanized the opposition and got city councils to pay attention. Cost isn't an effective argument, because police departments have very good copaganda about how ALPRs are a "force multiplier". Of course there isn't any one right answer to this, in and near places where there. have been high-profile abuses by local law enforcement officers (stalking, etc) that mighg well be a bigger issue.

Open ##3974096